Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42649987›Full record

ReviewCancers2026

Standardizing pCR/MPR Assessment in NSCLC After Neoadjuvant Therapy: Challenges and Perspectives.

Andrea Ascione, Flavia Adotti, Luigi Vittori, Caterina Chiappetta, Paolo Graziano

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Andrea AscioneDepartment of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4253-3193
Flavia AdottiDepartment of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9233-298X
Luigi VittoriDepartment of Experimental Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0009-0000-6327-0786
Caterina ChiappettaPathology Unit of Policlinico Umberto I, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.
Paolo GrazianoDepartment of Radiological, Oncological and Pathological Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7066-7896

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The expansion of neoadjuvant immune checkpoint blockade, chemoimmunotherapy, and targeted therapies in oncogene-driven tumors is reshaping the management of resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Major pathologic response (MPR) and pathologic complete response (pCR), defined respectively as 10% or less residual viable tumor (RVT) within the primary tumor bed and the complete absence of viable tumor in both the resected primary tumor and sampled regional lymph nodes, have become widely adopted early efficacy endpoints. Both are consistently associated with favorable survival outcomes at the patient level, although their validity as trial-level surrogates for long-term outcomes remains incompletely established. Accurate pathologic response assessment requires rigorous standardization of gross specimen handling, tumor bed sampling, and microscopic quantification of viable tumor, necrosis, and stroma. International recommendations have improved methodological harmonization, and reproducibility studies have demonstrated good interobserver agreement when standardized protocols are applied. Increasing evidence also indicates that RVT behaves as a continuous prognostic variable and that integration of primary-tumor and nodal response may improve postoperative risk stratification. Beyond quantification of RVT alone, additional histologic characteristics of the residual tumor, together with stromal and immune therapy-related features, may provide complementary prognostic information. Digital pathology and artificial intelligence may support more reproducible quantitative assessment, whereas circulating tumor DNA-based molecular residual disease evaluation may capture systemic risk not represented by the resection specimen. These emerging approaches remain investigational and require prospective validation. This review critically examines the methodological standardization, biological interpretation, and prognostic validation of pathologic response in resectable NSCLC, and discusses future strategies integrating histopathologic, digital, and molecular variables into post-neoadjuvant risk assessment.

Indexed as

circulating tumor DNAdigital pathologyIASLCmajor pathologic responsemolecular residual diseaseneoadjuvant therapynon-small cell lung cancerpathologic complete responseresidual viable tumor

Identifiers

PMID42649987
PMCPMC13510873

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.